Question #1
"Shtulman’s research indicates that as we become scientifically literate, we repress our naive beliefs but never eliminate them entirely. They lurk in our brains, chirping at us as we try to make sense of the world. Most of us do that by relying on personal experience and anecdotes, on stories rather than statistics."
People are taught from birth to make sense of the world through stories (primarily through children's books). Many are not introduced to science until middle or high school (I was not introduced to science until seventh grade). Would our relationships with science be less anecdote based and more science or statistic based if these modes of reasoning were introduced at a younger age?
Question #2
“We’re all in high school. We’ve never left high school,” says Marcia McNutt. “People still have a need to fit in, and that need to fit in is so strong that local values and local opinions are always trumping science. And they will continue to trump science, especially when there is no clear downside to ignoring science.”
There is always a downside to rejecting science. How can the downside to rejecting science be made more clear to those who doubt?
Question #3
"The Internet has democratized information, which is a good thing. But along with cable TV, it has made it possible to live in a 'filter bubble' that lets in only the information with which you already agree. How to penetrate the bubble? How to convert climate skeptics? Throwing more facts at them doesn’t help. Liz Neeley, who helps train scientists to be better communicators at an organization called Compass, says that people need to hear from believers they can trust, who share their fundamental values."
If people, particularly non-believers, need to hear about science from sources they trust, do news organizations and internet facilitators (Facebook, Reddit, etc.) have a responsibility to publish more of this information through certain information channels that are already trusted by skeptics?
Bonus: Refer to Parks and Rec Season 6 Episode 8 for a funny (fake) example of how hard it is to convince skeptics about the benefits of fluoride!
